I'm a community-elected moderator on Stack Overflow, and I think this is the biggest problem - outdated answers. Stack Overflow was founded in 2008, now about 8 years ago. New and better answers that may be much better than sloppy 8 year old answer can take years to rise up to compete with the ranking of those answers, as the the default sorting mechanism is by net up/down votes.
I'd like that addressed, in a way that minimizes disruption. Accepted answers should be allowed to float in the rankings instead of being pinned at the top after a number of years. And there should be an optional "hotness" sort that primarily considers recent votes (say in the past year).
Until they do address it, the new, great answers will remain buried.
Others like to suggest Reddit's sorting method ( https://redditblog.com/2009/10/15/reddits-new-comment-sortin... ), but that doesn't consider recency (my main concern) - and makes sense for them because voting is frozen after a period of time, whereas we can still vote on 8 year old questions on Stack Overflow - so revenge-downvoting (which, while verboten, can slip through the cracks) would have an outsized effect.
I agree with this part of your post, but the rest of it contradicts this statement.